CHA

2025-26 Season

LAMELO BALL

Charlotte Hornets | Guard | 6-7
LaMelo Ball
20.2 PPG
4.8 RPG
7.1 APG
28.1 MPG
+7.9 Impact

Ball produces at an elite rate for a 28-minute workload.

Embed this player card

Copy & paste this HTML into any page:

The widget updates automatically whenever our data does.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
+7.9
Scoring +17.9
Points 20.2 PPG = +12.6
Shot Making above expected FG% = +5.3
Creation +1.9
Creation 7.1 AST/g = +1.9
Turnovers -6.5
Turnovers 2.8/g = -6.5
Defense +0.8
Defense 1.2 STL, 0.2 BLK = +0.8
Hustle & Effort +3.3
Rebounds 4.8 RPG = +3.3
Raw Impact +17.4
Baseline (game-average expected) −9.5
Net Impact
+7.9
87th pctl vs Guards

PBP Credit: Every play is analyzed from play-by-play data. Scorers get difficulty-adjusted credit, assisters get creation value based on the shot opportunity they created, and turnovers are classified by type. Shot difficulty is derived from 1M+ shots across 4 seasons. Full methodology

SKILL DNA

Percentile rank vs 245 Guards with 10+ games

Scoring 92th
20.2 PPG
Efficiency 48th
54.7% TS
Playmaking 96th
7.1 APG
Rebounding 86th
4.8 RPG
Defense 65th
+8.6/g
Hustle 81th
+12.7/g
Creation 90th
+4.86/g
Shot Making 96th
+10.98/g
TO Discipline 8th
0.10/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

A maddening stretch of erratic shot selection and sloppy ball security defined LaMelo Ball's first twenty games. He teased absolute brilliance on 10/26 vs WAS, posting a staggering +23.0 impact score by masterfully orchestrating the pick-and-roll to completely dismantle the defense. Yet, that elite ceiling quickly gave way to a frustrating slump where his worst habits actively sabotaged the offense. Look at his 10/22 vs BKN performance. Despite logging a healthy 20 points, his impact cratered to -6.6 because a string of careless, live-ball turnovers directly ignited fast breaks for the opposition. The hidden costs of his game continued to mount on 11/19 vs IND, where a brutal 5-for-21 shooting night and a heavy volume of clanked jumpers dragged him down to a -5.0 impact score. When Ball stops settling for contested deep pull-ups and actually values possession, he operates as a transcendent offensive engine. Too often, however, his reckless initiation attempts severely damage his team's half-court efficiency.

A maddening rollercoaster of erratic decision-making and brilliant shot-making defined LaMelo Ball's midseason run. During the 12/26 vs ORL matchup, he tallied 22 points but dragged the offense down with a dismal -10.1 impact score. That negative rating stemmed directly from high-volume inefficiency, as he repeatedly settled for contested jumpers instead of finding the open man. He completely flipped the script off the bench on 01/08 vs IND, torching coverages for 33 points and generating a massive +15.0 impact by warping the floor with his deep pull-up gravity. Even when his jumper vanished, Ball occasionally found ways to win on the margins, like on 01/18 vs DEN where he drove a robust +8.7 impact on just 10 points through elite defensive engagement. Unfortunately, those mature habits frequently disappeared. His stretch ended with a miserable -10.2 impact on 01/31 vs SAS, where a disastrous lack of hustle—highlighted by a meager +0.2 hustle score—and severe shooting inefficiency completely tanked his overall performance.

This stretch of the season was defined by a maddening tug-of-war between LaMelo Ball's worst chucking impulses and his transcendent playmaking ceiling. Too often, his insatiable appetite for contested perimeter jumpers actively sabotaged the offense, acting as a hidden tax on his nightly production. Look no further than 03/06 vs MIA, where he scored 21 points but posted a disastrous -9.4 impact score because he repeatedly settled for deep, contested looks instead of running the half-court sets. Yet, when he actually calibrated his shot selection, the results were devastatingly effective. During 02/22 vs WAS, Ball erupted for 37 points on an absurd 10-of-15 shooting from beyond the arc, logging a massive +24.7 impact score by masterfully pacing the transition game. Even when his jumper completely abandoned him, he still found ways to salvage his value through sheer hustle. In 03/03 vs DAL, he shot a horrific 5-for-19 from the field for just 15 points, but still scrapped his way to a +3.9 impact by relying on defensive disruption and elite pacing to keep the offense humming.

IMPACT TIMELINE

Game-by-game performance vs average. Green = above average, red = below.

PATTERNS

Very consistent. Ball posts positive impact in 76% of games — you almost always get a productive night. Scoring varies by ~7 points, but the overall contribution stays positive.

Streaky shooter — only cracks 45% from the field in 35% of games. Efficiency is all over the place night-to-night.

Good defender on his best nights, but it comes and goes. Some games Ball locks in defensively, others he gets picked apart.

Getting better as the season goes on. First-half impact: +5.9, second-half: +9.8. That's a significant jump — could be a role change, confidence, or development clicking.

Hot right now — 8 straight games with positive impact. Longest positive run this season: 9 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 67 games with tracking data. Shows who guarded this player on offense and who he guarded on defense, with their shooting stats in those matchups.

ON OFFENSE: WHO GUARDED HIM

His shooting stats against each primary defender this season

A. Black 74.1 poss
FG% 30.0%
3P% 27.3%
PPP 0.2
PTS 15
D. Mitchell 63.1 poss
FG% 58.3%
3P% 57.1%
PPP 0.38
PTS 24
I. Quickley 62.9 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.24
PTS 15
M. McBride 56.2 poss
FG% 36.8%
3P% 16.7%
PPP 0.32
PTS 18
D. Daniels 53.1 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 20.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 7
R. Rollins 51.3 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.19
PTS 10
B. Carrington 49.1 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 55.6%
PPP 0.47
PTS 23
B. Sheppard 48.4 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 20.0%
PPP 0.29
PTS 14
V. Edgecombe 44.5 poss
FG% 36.4%
3P% 28.6%
PPP 0.22
PTS 10
K. Dunn 43.3 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.16
PTS 7

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

How opponents shot when he was the primary defender. Lower FG% = better defense.

K. Oubre Jr. 69.9 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.06
PTS 4
J. Hart 68.1 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 66.7%
PPP 0.15
PTS 10
D. Mitchell 67.7 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 66.7%
PPP 0.15
PTS 10
Z. Risacher 65.8 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 13
I. Quickley 63.7 poss
FG% 54.5%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.25
PTS 16
B. Sheppard 53.9 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.11
PTS 6
T. da Silva 53.8 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.13
PTS 7
J. Wells 48.3 poss
FG% 37.5%
3P% 16.7%
PPP 0.14
PTS 7
B. Carrington 48.3 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 4
K. Dunn 47.0 poss
FG% 16.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.04
PTS 2

SEASON STATS

74
Games
20.2
PPG
4.8
RPG
7.1
APG
1.2
SPG
0.2
BPG
40.6
FG%
36.3
3P%
90.5
FT%
28.1
MPG

GAME LOG

74 games played